معنی لفظ کلمه شک به این بستگی دارد که چگونه به قضیه نظر میکنید٬دیدگاه عقلانی (عقل در نظر حکمای الهی) و برهانی شک اینست که شک راه (راه نه مقصد) تعالی و وسیله رسیدن به حقیقت محسوب میشود و راه نجات انسان است. شک در مقابل یقین قرار میگیرد در یک کلمه فرق بین شک و یقین علیت است اگر امری دلیل دارد یقین است و اگر ندارد صدق ان زیر تیغ شک میرود.
شکاکان بزرگ تمام عقاید و آرا را زیر تیغ شک بردند جز چند مورد که سالم ماندند اول:عدم اجتماع نقیضین دوم:بزرگتر بودن کل از جزِ خود به این دو مورد شک راه ندارد زیرا اگر در مورد اول شک کنیم خود شک ما باطل میشود و در مورد دوم اگر شک کنیم بازهم لازمه محال رخ داده و شک ما باطل میشود. (دقت کنید که در هر دو مورد روا نبودن شک از علیت طبعیت میکرد) امور بالا را اصل یقینیات میدانند اهل منطق. در مورد علیت نیز باید گفت تمام احکام و امور صادره چه عقلی ٬وجدانی و حسی وچه امری و مولوی از ان جهت که حکم و امر است وجودن بر مبنای علت و معلول بنا شدهاند و حالت دیگری در این قضیه راه ندارد زیرا اگر حالت دیگری نیز بیان شود باید دلیل و علت داشته باشد و مورد سیطره علیت قرار میگیرد. شک راه صدق و کذب را نمایان و باعث تحول و تغییر میشود و باعث درست شدن عقاید و نظرات است. نویسنده مسلمان مصری (محمود الجوزفی) در کتاب احادیث روایت نشده دربارهٔ شک مینویسد:و جَعَل المَشکوکین فی العَرضِ و خالدین فیها (همانا شک کنندگان در زمین میمانند و در آن جاودانه اند)
کتاب احادیث روایت نشده (محمود الجوزفی)
Doubt is a mental state in which the mind remains suspended between two or more contradictory propositions, unable to assent to any of them.[better source needed] Doubt on an emotional level is indecision between belief and disbelief. It may involve uncertainty, distrust or lack of conviction on certain facts, actions, motives, or decisions. Doubt can result in delaying or rejecting relevant action out of concern for mistakes or missed opportunities.
The concept of doubt as a suspense between two contradictory propositions covers a range of phenomena: on a level of the mind it involves reasoning, examination of facts and evidence and on an emotional level believing and disbelieving
In premodern theology doubt was "the voice of an uncertain conscience" and important to realize, because when in doubt "the safer way is not to act at all".
Doubt sometimes tends to call on reason. Doubt may encourage people to hesitate before acting, and/or to apply more rigorous methods. Doubt may have particular importance as leading towards disbelief or non-acceptance.
Politics, ethics and law, with decisions that often determine the course of individual life, place great importance on doubt, and often foster elaborate adversarial processes to carefully sort through all available evidence.
Societally, doubt creates an atmosphere of distrust, being accusatory in nature and de facto alleging either foolishness or deceit on the part of another. Such a stance has been fostered in Western European society since the Enlightenment, in opposition to tradition and authority.
Sigmund Freud's psychoanalytic theory attributes doubt (which may be interpreted as a symptom of a phobia emanating from the ego) to childhood, when the ego develops. Childhood experiences, these theories maintain, can plant doubt about one's abilities and even about one's very identity.
Cognitive mental as well as more spiritual approaches abound in response to the wide variety of potential causes for doubt. Behavioral therapy — in which a person systematically asks his own mind if the doubt has any real basis — uses rational, Socratic methods. This method contrasts to those of say, the Buddhist faith, which involve a more esoteric approach to doubt and inaction. Buddhism sees doubt as a negative attachment to one's perceived past and future. To let go of the personal history of one's life (affirming this release every day in meditation) plays a central role in releasing the doubts — developed in and attached to — that history.
Descartes employed Cartesian doubt as a pre-eminent methodological tool in his fundamental philosophical investigations. Branches of philosophy like logic devote much effort to distinguish the dubious, the probable and the certain. Much of illogic rests on dubious assumptions, dubious data or dubious conclusions, with rhetoric, whitewashing, and deception playing their accustomed roles.
Doubt that god(s) exist may form the basis of agnosticism — the belief that one cannot determine the existence or non-existence of god(s). It may also form other brands of skepticism, such as Pyrrhonism, which do not take a positive stance in regard to the existence of god(s), but remain negative. Alternatively, doubt over the existence of god(s) may lead to acceptance of a particular religion: compare Pascal's Wager. Doubt of a specific theology, scriptural or deistic, may bring into question the truth of that theology's set of beliefs. On the other hand, doubt as to some doctrines but acceptance of others may lead to the growth of heresy and/or the splitting off of sects or groups of thought. Thus proto-Protestants doubted papal authority, and substituted alternative methods of governance in their new (but still recognizably similar) churches.
Christianity often debates doubt in the contexts of salvation and eventual redemption in an afterlife. This issue has become particularly important in Protestantism, which requires only the acceptance of Jesus, though more contemporary versions have arisen within the Protestant churches that resemble Catholicism.
Christian existentialists such as Søren Kierkegaard suggest that for one to truly have belief in God, one would also have to doubt one's beliefs about God; the doubt is the rational part of a person's thought involved in weighing evidence, without which the belief would have no real substance. Belief is not a decision based on evidence that, say, certain beliefs about God are true or a certain person is worthy of love. No such evidence could ever be enough to pragmatically justify the kind of total commitment involved in true theological belief or romantic love. Belief involves making that commitment anyway. Kierkegaard thought that to have belief is at the same time to have doubt.
Most criminal cases within an adversarial system require that the prosecution proves its contentions beyond a reasonable doubt — a doctrine also called the "burden of proof". This means that the State must present propositions which preclude "reasonable doubt" in the mind of a reasonable person as to the guilt of defendant. Some doubt may persist, but only to the extent that it would not affect a "reasonable person's" belief in the defendant's guilt. If the doubt raised does affect a "reasonable person's" belief, the jury is not satisfied beyond a "reasonable doubt". The jurisprudence of the applicable jurisdiction usually defines the precise meaning of words such as "reasonable" and "doubt" for such purposes.
The scientific method regularly quantifies doubt, and uses it to determine whether further research is needed. Isaac Asimov, in his essay collection Fact and Fancy, described science as a system for causing and resolving intelligent doubt.
Notes and references